DEI Injunction Terminated by Federal Court of Appeals Reinstating DEI Certification Requirement and Civil False Claims Act Risk

As previously reported, one of the first executive orders (EO 14173) issued by President Trump was to rescind Executive Order 11246, issued by President Lyndon B. Johnson, which required federal contractors and subcontractors to engage in affirmative action with respect to women and minorities. In EO 14173, President Trump also directed those federal agencies contracting with all entities to cause the end of all “illegal” DEI and DEIA programs by — among other things — requiring federal contractors and subcontractors to “certify” that they do “not operate any programs promoting DEI that violate any applicable Federal anti-discrimination laws.” As also reported, this “certification” requirement gives rise to potentially significant exposure for contractors under the civil False Claims Act if a contractor was later found to have “falsely” submitted its certification — i.e., that it was maintaining an “illegal” DEI or DEIA program.

Not long after issuance of EO 14173, litigation was initiated, challenging the executive order as unconstitutionally vague and a violation of the First Amendment, among other arguments: The DEI-related provisions, including the certification requirement, based on the failure of the executive order to define or provide any guidance as to what would be considered an “illegal” DEI or DEIA program. In essence, the plaintiffs asserted that, without some defining guidance, the executive order was overly broad and could lead to significant exposure for contractors. As we reported, the federal district court agreed and entered a nationwide injunction prohibiting enforcement of the DEI-related provisions with limited exception. Almost immediately thereafter, the Trump administration appealed the entry of the injunction to the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals.

On March 14, 2025, the Federal Appellate Court stayed the nationwide injunction, finding that the injunction was overly broad and that the executive order itself is likely not unconstitutional as it merely directs agency action. The Appeals Court opined that we must wait to see how the various agencies implement the directives within the executive order, and whether such implementation is done in a constitutional manner. As a result of the most recent court decision, the DEI certification requirement for government contractors and the civil False Claims Act risk is “back in play.”

However, this is likely not the end of the story, as the manner of implementation and enforcement by the various federal agencies is sure to generate questions and challenges. The terminology of the required certifications and the initiation of civil False Claims Act cases on the basis of alleged “illegal” DEI or DEIA programs will lead to legal challenges and a developing body of caselaw.

Stay tuned for more developments.

Disclaimer

This blog is made available by Foley & Lardner LLP (“Foley” or “the Firm”) for informational purposes only. It is not meant to convey the Firm’s legal position on behalf of any client, nor is it intended to convey specific legal advice. Any opinions expressed in this article do not necessarily reflect the views of Foley & Lardner LLP, its partners, or its clients. Accordingly, do not act upon this information without seeking counsel from a licensed attorney. This blog is not intended to create, and receipt of it does not constitute, an attorney-client relationship. Communicating with Foley through this website by email, blog post, or otherwise, does not create an attorney-client relationship for any legal matter. Therefore, any communication or material you transmit to Foley through this blog, whether by email, blog post or any other manner, will not be treated as confidential or proprietary. The information on this blog is published “AS IS” and is not guaranteed to be complete, accurate, and or up-to-date. Foley makes no representations or warranties of any kind, express or implied, as to the operation or content of the site. Foley expressly disclaims all other guarantees, warranties, conditions and representations of any kind, either express or implied, whether arising under any statute, law, commercial use or otherwise, including implied warranties of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. In no event shall Foley or any of its partners, officers, employees, agents or affiliates be liable, directly or indirectly, under any theory of law (contract, tort, negligence or otherwise), to you or anyone else, for any claims, losses or damages, direct, indirect special, incidental, punitive or consequential, resulting from or occasioned by the creation, use of or reliance on this site (including information and other content) or any third party websites or the information, resources or material accessed through any such websites. In some jurisdictions, the contents of this blog may be considered Attorney Advertising. If applicable, please note that prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Photographs are for dramatization purposes only and may include models. Likenesses do not necessarily imply current client, partnership or employee status.